Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34370930›Full record

ArticleKidney research and clinical practice2021

Mixed- versus predilution hemodiafiltration effects on convection volume and small and middle molecule clearance in hemodialysis patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Kyoung Sook Park, Ea Wha Kang, Tae Ik Chang, Wonji Jo, Jung Tak Park, Tae-Hyun Yoo, Shin-Wook Kang, Seung Hyeok Han

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Kidney research and clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Comparative Analysis of Hemodiafiltration Methods: Efficacy and Safety in Maintenance Hemodialysis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kyoung Sook ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Ea Wha KangDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Tae Ik ChangDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Wonji JoDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institute of Kidney Disease Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jung Tak ParkDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institute of Kidney Disease Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Tae-Hyun YooDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institute of Kidney Disease Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Shin-Wook KangDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institute of Kidney Disease Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Seung Hyeok HanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Institute of Kidney Disease Research, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Yonsei University · KRNational Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital · KR

Funding

Fresenius Medical Care Korea
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of newly developed mixed-dilution hemodiafiltration (HDF) can supplement the weaknesses of pre- and postdilution HDF. However, it is unclear whether mixed-HDF performs well compared to predilution HDF.

methodsWe conducted a prospective, open-labeled, randomized controlled trial from two hemodialysis centers in Korea. Between January 2017 and September 2019, 60 patients who underwent chronic hemodialysis were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to receive either predilution HDF (n = 30) or mixed-HDF (n = 30) for 6 months. We compared convection volume, changes in small- and medium-sized molecule clearance, high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) level, and dialysis-related parameters between the two dialysis modalities.

resultsA mean effective convection volume of 41.0 ± 10.3 L/session in the predilution HDF group and 51.5 ± 9.0 L/session in the mixed-HDF group was obtained by averaging values of three time-points. The difference in effective convection volume between the groups was 10.5 ± 1.3 L/session. This met the preset noninferiority criteria, suggesting that mixed-HDF was noninferior to predilution HDF. Moreover, the β2-microglobulin reduction rate was greater in the mixed-HDF group than in the predilution HDF group, while mixed-HDF provided greater transmembrane pressure. There were no significant between-group differences in Kt/V urea levels, changes in predialysis hs-CRP levels, proportions of overhydration, or blood pressure values. Symptomatic intradialytic hypotension episodes and other adverse events occurred similarly in the two groups.

conclusionUse of mixed-HDF was comparable to predilution HDF in terms of delivered convection volume and clinical parameters. Moreover, mixed-HDF provided better β2-microglobulin clearance than predilution HDF.

Indexed as

Convection volumeHemodiafiltrationMixed online hemodiafiltrationRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID34370930
PMCPMC8476308
OpenAlexW3187379473

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.